/sci/ - Science & Math

>>5831799
>Nuclear weapons proliferation and the potential for large-scale disasters are not trivial or imaginary concerns
Which is why we put so much effort and research into making it safer.

>Nuclear power is dangerous
LIFE is dangerous. Energy production is dangerous. Every time you dally with enough force, you're in mortal danger.

And people still fly, walk, drive cars, smoke, hunt, hike, blow stuff up, build dams, farm the land on the slopes of volcanoes and all that good stuff.

You can't wall yourself up in your home and cover yourself with mattresses to ward off danger and we as a species can't return to driving horse-drawn carriages(even if they were anywhere near as safe as cars) and chopping wood for our heating and lighting needs.

We can't make danger go away completely, we can only ever engineer the systems to an acceptable level.

But if you're so concerned about the safety of nuclear power, you must be dozens, hundreds of times more concerned about the dangers caused by oil and coal power.

No? Then you're talking out your ass.

>Also wondering if we've got to a point where we can "relieve stress" non-violently from a chamber, artificially?

http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/yvo/about/faq/faqactivity.php

>Can you release some of the pressure at Yellowstone by drilling into the volcano?
>Scientists agree that drilling into a volcano would be of questionable usefulness. Notwithstanding the enormous expense and technological difficulties in drilling through hot, mushy rock, drilling is unlikely to have much effect. At near magmatic temperatures and pressures, any hole would rapidly become sealed by minerals crystallizing from the natural fluids that are present at those depths.

I really don't want Yellowstone to explode for at least another 20 years. At that time we'll have more sophisticated technology to reconstruct society relatively easily. Y'know, an ice age doesn't exactly help progress.

>>3511537

Cool.